urbanSTL

STLAPTS wrote:Let’s start an UrbanSTL PAC to support a candidate to run against Pihl. I will pitch in 10k. Yes. I’m serious.

gone corporate wrote: ↑

Jul 14, 2022

Alderwoman Pihl is my representative here in the 17th Ward. When she took office, I was very ready to watch her perform in the job. She had her shot, and she took it. Unfortunately, she has continued to miss open layups. She's a decent person, a good human with well-meaning intent. Same time, it's becoming quite obvious that she's just not qualified to actually do the job she was elected to do. 

billikens&bricks wrote: ↑

Jul 21, 2022

Agreed on the private developer's role and the lack of a replacement system. I've also got questions and we should know more about what's happening.

The only part I'll push back on (and this goes to my earlier point) is that shepherding development is a "massive part of the job". I realize some will say that development is necessarily a larger part of her job given her ward but should it be? Ideally, development should not be a bigger part of an alderman's job than anything else in their purview. Without Park Central as a catchall for development in the ward, I'm not surprised she's overwhelmed. The real question is whether she should be penalized for admitting as much? I'm not sure that's constructive or leads to outcomes most of us desire. Plus, how long has she even been in office? A year or so? And folks already want to chase her out?

Overall, I think those calling her incompetent or incapable are missing the forest for the trees. We obviously all care about development on this forum and want to see it happen asap but her ward elected her to reform the development process (among many other things). We probably all agree on some level that there are better ways to do it (and we should keep adding our voices to the conversation) but it was always going to be messy. Plus, her stand may lead to wider, necessary reforms. 

SB in BH wrote: ↑

Jul 21, 2022

I'm not a developer but have some minor experience coming from the Government Relations side of one of the Cortex partners. My understanding is that Joe Rubberstamp Roddy didn't review much of anything (least of all projects driven by BJC/WUSM), provided the NIA was on board (a mere formality), and was very helpful moving things along with the rest of the board and the bureaucracy. This arguably was the right approach given the positive growth in the ward during his tenure, but there's a strong case to be made that a more judicious approach is now warranted.

Given that Roddy ran the show with an open hand, so to speak, for so long, it shouldn't be surprising that it's taking a new alderperson some time to find their feet, especially given the antiquated manner by which everything is done in our fair city. And I would assume she also has a day job, as most of them do.

Based on the Ray Hartmann piece in last week's RFT, Ald. Pihl's resume suggests she's overqualified for the job, including the development aspect of it. Assuming that's the case, and if she takes her job seriously and is actually taking the time to evaluate these projects, then it shouldn't be a surprise that she's hit a backlog and its taking much longer than when Roddy was in charge. I understand this must be frustrating--nobody likes being made to work or wait for something they're used to getting right away with no questions asked--but to me it seems absolutely necessary if the goal is more purposeful and prudent development, especially for projects requesting or receiving public subsidy, like Cortex. 

This is a development driven by the most wealthy and powerful institutions and individuals in the region, with the support of the State and the feds, and with two decades of local support as well. It's arguably the hottest piece of action in the game. It seems reasonable to me, as a mere observer. that its time to take the thumb of the city taxpayer off the scale and let the private market determine its future. Maybe Ald. Pihl will reach a different conclusion based on her documented expertise. We'll just have to wait.

TheWayoftheArch_V2.0 wrote: ↑

Jul 23, 2022

I disagree with the people asserting that "it was bound to be messy."  This is untrue.  You either leave the mechanisms in place until your reforms are ready for roll out, or you put in the time before you take office to have a plan in place for when you take your seat.  No functional enterprise would eliminate their customer service department (maybe Lux did/has?) which is effectively what she did. 

gone corporate wrote:STL Biz Journal: 'This is vital': Key meeting set on subsidies for Cortex development

Cortex has its $200MM TIF still outstanding since 2013. There's still around $79MM of it, noting inaction during the Covid-19 pandemic. Second week of September, they're seeking an outlay of $4.6MM for improvements to Sarah Street in furtherance of the $50.5MM Cortex K development. They're also seeking to retain the balance of the unspent TIF funds for future developments that weren't able to be accomplished in the past few years. 

However... Alderwoman Pihl, whose 17th Ward includes Cortex (side note: my home, too), is "balking" at any further outlays. She's wanting Cortex to have a new TIF deal even though the existing TIF deal is still active until February next year. Also, certain City TIF commissioners are talking about new requirements, such as women-owned and minority-owned firms in Cortex, plus redrawing Cortex K to have more affordable housing (they've already shrunk their original plans for the site because of costs), all while saying Cortex's TIF takes monies from schools, no matter how accretive net revenues contribute to school funding. Also, certain commissioners are apprehensive about Cortex retaining its TIF funding going forward if final plans for all allotments aren't already written. 

Sam Fiorello, Cortex President & CEO, on the TIF: "This is vital." Regarding Alderwoman Pihl, he said, "We have a package in front of her that I think is incredibly fair and shows our alignment with her ambitions to have intentionality in all the investments." It also includes $250K of Cortex monies going to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. 

Also, Fiorello stated that Mayor Jones' office and the SLDC have been quite helpful in furthering Cortex retaining its TIF, including bringing a bill to the Board of Aldermen in September or October (check the post by @sc4mayor above for a Post-Dispatch article on the Mayor's support). Fiorello, however, wouldn't comment on whether or not another alderman could or would bring this to the BoA if Pihl doesn't...


Alderwoman Pihl: Get this done already, dammit! We your constituents are tired of your lollygagging and dragging things nowhere! 
DON'T KILL CORTEX!  

quincunx wrote: ↑

Aug 10, 2022

Yes, typically in a TIF 100% of the new property taxes and 50% of the new sales taxes are paid, but go to pay off the TIF bonds not to the gov'ts that usually get them.

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Aug 11, 2022

I’ve soured to these types of arrangements. Larger deals elsewhere in the city are moving forward, more quickly, with/without individual incentive agreements.

I think Cortex has served its purpose. It stabilized infrastructure, developed a few key resources, and gave the area vision. They should continue to facilitate an inclusive and innovative community.

Is it time to release most of their land bank and let the market grow the area organically?